State of Washington et al v. Russell Vought et al

Filing 45

ORDER granting Plaintiff's #15 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; granting Korematsu Center's #25 Motion for Leave to File. Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and those persons in active concert or participation with them are PRELIMINARILY ENJOINED from selling the Archives facility pursuant to duties established by FASTA and from taking any actions to facilitate or effectuate a sale of the Archives facility under FASTA until a final determination on the merits is issued by this Court. Signed by U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour.(MW)

Case 2:21-cv-00002-JCC Document 45 Filed 02/16/21 Page 1 of 3

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9

STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al.,

10

Plaintiffs,

ORDER

v.

11
12

CASE NO. C21-0002-JCC

ROB FAIRWEATHER, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction

16

(Dkt. No. 15) and the Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality’s (“Korematsu Center”)

17

unopposed motion for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae in support of Plaintiffs’ motion (Dkt.

18

No. 25). 1 Having thoroughly considered the parties’ briefing and the relevant record, and having

19

heard the parties’ oral argument, the Court hereby GRANTS the motion for a preliminary

20

injunction (Dkt. No. 15) and GRANTS the motion for leave to file an amicus curiae brief (Dkt.

21

No. 25) for the reasons explained herein.

22
23
24
25
26

1

The Court declines Plaintiffs’ invitation to presently rule on Defendants’ motion to
dismiss Counts I–III. (See Dkt. No. 40 at 3 n.1.) Rather, the Court will provide a separate ruling
on Defendants’ motion once it is fully briefed and ripe for consideration. Nevertheless, the Court
has considered Defendants’ jurisdictional arguments in their briefing to date and during oral
argument. Those arguments do not pose an impediment to the Court’s ability to presently rule on
Plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction motion. See Shell Offshore Inc. v. Greenpeace, Inc., 864 F.
Supp. 2d 839, 842 (D. Alaska 2012), aff’d, 709 F.3d 1281 (9th Cir. 2013).
ORDER
C21-0002-JCC
PAGE - 1

Case 2:21-cv-00002-JCC Document 45 Filed 02/16/21 Page 2 of 3

1

On January 24, 2020, Defendant the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”),

2

approved the sale of the Federal Archives and Records Center in Seattle (“Archives facility”)

3

pursuant to the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 2016 (“FASTA”), Pub. L. No. 114-287,

4

130 Stat. 1463 (2016). (Dkt. No. 16-1 at 166–67.) According to the Public Buildings Reform

5

Board, which was established by FASTA, the Government intends to “bring the propert[y] to

6

market by early 2021.” (Id. at 169.) Plaintiffs, comprised of State and local governments, tribal

7

governments, Alaska Native Corporations, tribal communities, and historical and cultural

8

organizations, brought suit pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act in an effort to halt the

9

sale. (See Dkt. No. 30.) Plaintiffs assert that FASTA exempts facilities like the Archives from its

10

provisions and that, regardless, Defendants OMB and General Services Administration (“GSA”)

11

failed to follow FASTA’s section 11 procedural requirements in recommending that the Archives

12

facility be sold pursuant to FASTA. (See id. at 69–76.)

13

Plaintiffs now move for a preliminary injunction. (Dkt. No. 15.) They ask the Court to

14

enjoin Defendants from selling the Seattle facility pursuant to Defendants’ FASTA authority

15

until a final determination on the merits of Plaintiffs’ claims can be made by the Court. (Id.)

16

Plaintiffs argue that a preliminary injunction is required to ensure that no sale of the property

17

takes place during the pendency of this matter. (Id.) In seeking a preliminary injunction, the

18

moving party must establish “that [it] is likely to succeed on the merits, that [it] is likely to suffer

19

irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in [its]

20

favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.” Winter v. Nat’l Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555

21

U.S. 7, 20 (2008); see also Drakes Bay Oyster Co. v. Jewell, 747 F.3d 1073, 1085 (9th Cir.

22

2014). In holding that Plaintiffs have established the requisite elements, the Court incorporates

23

Plaintiffs’ proposed factual findings and legal conclusions (See Dkt. No. 37 at 1–14, ¶¶ 1–51;

24

14–27, ¶¶ 1–40.) On this basis, Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction is GRANTED.

25

The Korematsu Center also moves for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of

26

Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction. (Dkt. No. 25.) The motion is unopposed. District
ORDER
C21-0002-JCC
PAGE - 2

Case 2:21-cv-00002-JCC Document 45 Filed 02/16/21 Page 3 of 3

1

courts have “broad discretion” regarding the appointment of amici and frequently welcome

2

amicus briefs from non-parties “concerning legal issues that have potential ramifications beyond

3

the parties directly involved.” Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1260 (9th Cir. 1982); Skokomish

4

Indian Tribe v. Goldmark, Case No. C13-5071-JLR, Dkt. No. 91 at 1 (W.D. Wash. 2013)

5

(quoting Ryan v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n, 125 F.3d 1062, 1064 (7th Cir. 1997)).

6

Moreover, “there is no rule that amici must be totally disinterested.” Funbus Sys., Inc. v. State of

7

Cal. Pub. Utils. Comm’n, 801 F.2d 1120, 1125 (9th Cir. 1986) (citation omitted); see Hoptowit,

8

682 F.2d at 1260 (affirming district court’s appointment of amicus curiae even though amicus

9

entirely supported only one party’s arguments). Here, the Korematsu Center’s proposed brief is

10

of assistance to the Court in considering the import of FASTA’s exclusion for properties used in

11

connection with conservation activities. (See generally Dkt. No. 25-1.) Accordingly, the motion

12

is GRANTED.

13

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction and the

14

Korematsu Center’s motion for leave to file an amicus brief (Dkt. Nos. 15, 25) are GRANTED.

15

Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and those persons in active

16

concert or participation with them are PRELIMINARILY ENJOINED from selling the Archives

17

facility pursuant to duties established by FASTA and from taking any actions to facilitate or

18

effectuate a sale of the Archives facility under FASTA until a final determination on the merits is

19

issued by this Court. This preliminary injunction shall remain in effect during the pendency of

20

this case or until further order of the Court.

21

DATED this 16th day of February 2021.

A

22
23
24

John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

25
26
ORDER
C21-0002-JCC
PAGE - 3